Course: Western Civilization: Ancient and Medieval Europe
School: Arizona State University via edX
Instructors: Dr. Ian Frederick Moulton et al
Quote:[W]e will explore European civilization from its beginnings in ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia to the voyages of Christopher Columbus. We will study politics, warfare, trade, religion, art, culture, and daily life, as well as the legacy of ancient and medieval civilizations to the modern world.
Remember those “Eight countries in 10 days” European tours that were so popular in the 60s? This course reminded me a lot of those: a whirlwind trip through the famous historic and cultural landmarks of 4000 years in 7 weeks. It’s part of Arizona State University’s Global Freshman Academy, where students can, if exam proctoring conditions are met and a (signficant) fee paid, earn ASU credit upon passing (whether or not that credit will transfer to other schools is uncertain). And as a seven-week Freshman course covering upwards of 4000 years of civilization, it’s pretty good.
Mesopotamia and Egypt were dispatched in the first week, Greece in the second, Rome in the third. Then, an interesting twist: a week on Israel and the Jewish People; this caused some consternation as a lecture recounting the basic plot of Genesis and Exodus served as an introduction, rather than showing up in the Religion or Cultural section. This was defended by the view that a culture’s beliefs are the best way of understanding the people, which is a good point, but I still wonder if the lecture should have made more clear the distinction between factually supported history and cultural belief. Byzantium got itself a week, and the Middle Ages in Western Europe was split up over two weeks.
Each unit included subchapters on the elements listed above: politics and war, trade, religion, culture, etc. I was impressed that primary sources – in translation and edited, of course – were included for most subchapters, works like the legend of Gilgamesh, the Egyptian Book of the Dead, Genesis, Cicero, Pope Urban’s call to the First Crusade, and Boccaccio’s Decameron. I was a bit amused that the first canto of the Inferno from Dante’s Divine Comedy was included under the heading of “Daily Life”; I would’ve expected to see it in religion, culture, or even politics (since he wrote it as an exile and included numerous mentions of Guelphs and Ghibellines) but they defended that choice by invoking the stories of Paulo and Francesca and other Florentine contemporaries.
Each week included a quiz and a set of “flashcards” via Cerego. I’ve seen Cerego used in other courses; it’s quite an interesting idea, and great where memorization of many elements is important (I found it invaluable when learning amino acids, though I let it slide and have forgotten them all). Here, the only requirement was to get to Level 1, which is more or less useless.
Discussion questions were posted each week. I’ve rather soured on discussion questions, since they tend to generate more or less identical responses parroting the lectures from most students. I think discussion questions could do other things (as they did in the Egypt course, for that matter), such as invite speculative inquiry on how something might happen prior to lectures, but that isn’t how they’re typically used.
Students taking the credited course were required to take some of the exams under proctored conditions (the rest of us just proceeded as usual). I can’t even deal with the requirements of verification, let alone instructions like “no one may enter or leave the room” or “no radio or tv or voices can be present.” I heard there were some technical issues early on, but I didn’t pay much attention; those counting on earning credit should be more diligent as to contingency plans.
In addition to the quizzes, Cerego, and two exams, a Design Project accounted for 5% to the total score for the course. The assignment was extremely vague – do something, a paper, video, podcast, music, magazine article – to demonstrate understanding of some objective of the course. Grading was by self-assessment. This is the second time I’ve run into a “do something” project with a low bar for passing, and while I appreciate the opportunity for creativity and self-direction, I’m dubious about the value of self-assessment on such a loosely defined project. A few students shared their efforts, as we were encouraged to do, and these showed some interesting creativity: a “newly discovered” Platonic dialog, a series of letters between fictional citizens of Rome, a blog post researching Hadrian’s Wall.
As a freshman level survey course, I think this was successful; in fact, extra points for including primary documents, and for looking beyond battles, kings, and dates. It wasn’t what I was hoping for, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t have value for what it is.